own experience is this, that unless it is in
some few cases where the gentleman elected
or appointed orphans' court judge has been
a long time in office, or repeatedly appointed,
the register of wills is almost uniformly the
judge of the orphans' court. In the transac-
tion of business, and even in matters where he
has no jurisdiction by law, the judges of the
orphans' court constantly appeal to the reg-
ister of wills to know what they shall do in
this case or in that case; so that in fact they
are in most cases a mere fifth wheel to a coach.
If the orphans' court is abolished, it will be a
large saving of expense, so far as their salary
is concerned. If the judge is resident in the
county, there will be a large saving of ex-
pense in the item I have mentioned, in regard
to the speedy hearing of criminal cases.
The legislature might provide for these
matters; and might even provide, if neces-
sary for extending the jurisdiction of the reg-
ister of wills. He might be given jurisdic-
tion in all matters relating to apprentices and
some other matters, that would render the
orphans' court totally insignificant. As we
all know, unless they halve had any consider-
able experience, the register of wills is judge
of the orphans' court per se, because they
are obliged to rely upon him. If we make
the judge of the circuit court judge of the
orphans' court, there is no necessity for asso-
ciate judges of the orphans' court. In this
way the expense would be in some measure
compensated for in giving a judge to each
county.
Besides the argument mentioned by my
friend from Prince George's (Mr. Berry,) it
is a great convenience to the people to have a
judge resident on the spot, in a case of man-
damus, or cases of that sort. These are
my reasons for advocating, at the proper
time and place, the abolishment of the or-
phans' court, and the extension of the juris-
diction of the register of wills. I think we
shall have abundant employment for a judge
in each county.
Mr. MAYHUGH. It would appear from the
efforts made here to create new offices in the
judiciary system of the State, that the people
were really wild upon the subject in the coun-
ties and the city of Baltimore. It would real-
ly appear to the stranger coming into this con-
vention, that the people were holding meetings
and sending memorials to this convention to
induce us to make important changes. In my
county the question has been scarcely mooted
in my presence. Now and then you would
hear a man speaking of the judiciary system,
and some little alterations or changes that
ought to be made in it; but us a whole, the
people of the county have rested perfectly satisfied
with the judiciary under the old system.
In my own opinion, it is a question of extrav-
agance, and not of the retrenchment which
should be male at the proper time. I believe
that the people have no desire to create new |
offices, or to go into extravagance in this state
of chaos and confusion. The people are al-
ready burdened with taxes, if we adopt the
amendment under consideration, by which we
create from twenty to twenty-five new offices,
having already created five, making thirty,
the convention will have incurred an expense
of at least fifty or seventy-five thousand dol-
lars annually. It is upon this ground that 1
oppose the amendment.
And not only upon that; for it is paying
men, really, for doing nothing. The judges
of the judicial districts in all the counties have
been doing the work. They are able and com-
petent for the task. Why then should we sep-
arate the judicial districts, and give one judge
to each county, doubling the expense, when
there is no more labor to be performed ?
1 oppose the amendment upon these two
grounds; in the first place, I say it is extravagant;
and in the second place, I say it is ab-
solutely paying men for doing nothing. If
you will decrease their salaries to $l,000 each,
it might meet that objection; but that you
could not do simply because you could noise-
cure the learning, talent and ability, neces-
sary for the position. Therefore I oppose the
amendment, and hope there is no disposition
upon the part of the convention to pass such
an amendment.
Mr. SCHLEY. I understood the gentleman
from Prince George's who addressed the con-
vention just now (Mr. Berry.) to express a
willingness that the counties should pay the
expenses of their courts I therefore wish to
offer an amendment to the proposed amend-
ment, to be added to the end thereof, in the
following words:
"The salary of the circuit judges shall be
levied and paid by the respective counties
in which they act."
My object in doing so has been already in-
dicated by some of the gentlemen who have
addressed the convention. The great objec-
tion to the multiplication of the number of
the judges, has been the enormous expense
that is imposed upon the State. I find by
statement A, of the comptroller's report, for
illustration, taking several of the amounts of
the levy of 1863 for the different coun-
ties, that the total assessment or levy upon
the assessed value of the real and per-
sonal property of St. Mary's county, is
$9,028.71; while in my county there is an
assessment of $54,822.93; showing a dispro-
portion in the ratio of six to one in the reve-
nue levied by the State, it is manifest that
we are paying five-sixths of the salary of the
judges in the county of St. Mary's. A like
disparity exists between other counties. In
Prince George's the assessments $22,923 94 ;
and in Baltimore county $53,791.68; show-
ing a disparity, not so wide as that I have al-
ready mentioned, but more than two and a
half to one. Of the total amount of assess-
ment upon the State, I find that my county |
